2 ms·

I don't think it's hard to argue that. When countries like China censor, what they do is make companies delete anything they don't like. Now it is the company d

I don't think it's hard to argue that. When countries like China censor, what they do is make companies delete anything they don't like. Now it is the company directly who decides to censor which in my opinion is worse. Why worse? Because you don't get to elect those who run the company. In a democracy you have the chance to change the government but that can't be done with a private company. Now, when you have a few companies that control most of the communication channels and they can censor indiscriminately anyone who they don't like, you're absolutely doomed.

gkoberger 6y ago
So you'd rather the current government make this decision? You know, the government run by a president who directly incited all this "hang mike pence" stuff, right from Twitter itself? While the rioting was happening, the president tweeted "Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!" And his lawyer tweeted "[Pence] will face execution by firing squad. He is a coward & will sing like a bird & confess ALL." I'm not sure if those are the people we want making these decisions. Like I said, I don't like any of this. I want to live in a world where we don't have to decide between the government and large companies, neither of which I particularly like. But alas, here we are... and currently, Twitter is the one on the side of "not lynching the VP", so I guess I'm on their side.
- Darmody 6y ago
  You're completely missing my point. Of course anyone with more than 2 neurons is on the side of "not lynching the VP". My point was that a company like Twitter should not censor people talking about the fact that rioters chanted "hang mike pence".
  - gkoberger 6y ago
    I'm not missing it, I'm disagreeing. You can't say a company removing content is something China would do. It's the opposite. In an authoritarian regime, Twitter would be forced to be in lock step with the government, and the opposite is happening now. Think of it as checks and balances.

gkoberger 6y ago

So you'd rather the current government make this decision? You know, the government run by a president who directly incited all this "hang mike pence" stuff, right from Twitter itself? While the rioting was happening, the president tweeted "Mike Pence didn't have the courage to do what should have been done to protect our Country and our Constitution, giving States a chance to certify a corrected set of facts, not the fraudulent or inaccurate ones which they were asked to previously certify. USA demands the truth!" And his lawyer tweeted "[Pence] will face execution by firing squad. He is a coward & will sing like a bird & confess ALL." I'm not sure if those are the people we want making these decisions. Like I said, I don't like any of this. I want to live in a world where we don't have to decide between the government and large companies, neither of which I particularly like. But alas, here we are... and currently, Twitter is the one on the side of "not lynching the VP", so I guess I'm on their side.

Darmody 6y ago
You're completely missing my point. Of course anyone with more than 2 neurons is on the side of "not lynching the VP". My point was that a company like Twitter should not censor people talking about the fact that rioters chanted "hang mike pence".
- gkoberger 6y ago
  I'm not missing it, I'm disagreeing. You can't say a company removing content is something China would do. It's the opposite. In an authoritarian regime, Twitter would be forced to be in lock step with the government, and the opposite is happening now. Think of it as checks and balances.